Independence and objectivity are the core professional ethics requirements of internal auditors, and independence is basically not controlled by the auditor, but objectivity can be adhered to.
On the other hand, whether or not you can maintain objectivity is the core criterion for a person to be qualified to be an internal auditor.
So, can a qualified internal auditor really maintain objectivity?
Let's be honest: it's really hard!
Sometimes, even if you are objective in your heart, it is difficult to make conclusions that are objective.
A small thing
Three months ago, I was at work, and my son's homeroom teacher (third grade of primary school) called and said, "Your child knocked someone else's child down, and the back of the child's head is bumping on the corner of the table, and he has been screaming for a headache, so go to the hospital to see it!" ”
As soon as I heard it, "I can't help it", I quickly asked for leave.
In a hurry, he took the children and mothers to the hospital together, really afraid that if a good villain came out, things would be big.
After a check, with supplements, it cost thousands of dollars! Luckily, the kid just had a little red and swollen scalp and his head was fine.
Relieved, he began to ask how he had knocked the child down.
Because my children are very quiet, a little thin, and their personality is not rash, how can they come out of this file?
When I asked, I learned that during the class, when milk was distributed in the class, a group of children rushed forward and knocked the child down.
All the kids were hiding, only my kids were saying "I'm sorry!" ”
Because the teacher did not see who hit it (even if he saw it, he would say that he could not see it, and there was no moral issue here), only my child said "sorry", so only my child could bear the responsibility.
He also asked the child who was knocked down, and he said that he didn't see clearly, it was a group of people who hit him, and the hardest was the fat and strong boy in his class, who often bullied him on weekdays.
My son also said that he only touched the child's arm, and did not notice whether he knocked it down himself, he said sorry when he saw someone fall.
Descriptions of several children, the facts are clear.
I understood, the teacher understood, even the mother of the child who was hit: "The person who knocked over the child was not my son at all." ”
But only my son said a few words, "I'm sorry!" Then, you have to take on the responsibility of "knocking people over.".
At this point, I didn't mention anything like my son's wrongdoing, as long as the children were safe
It's not that I feel how wronged I am, but I think that this matter just reflects a phenomenon: when there is a problem, people who will hide and push will often be fine, and people who have responsibilities will take responsibility!
As an internal auditor, I often have to make the same judgment as my son's class teacher on weekdays: if something goes wrong, you must find the person responsible.
However, even a mature internal auditor sometimes has a hard time maintaining objectivity, just like the class teacher, who knows that it was not my son who hit him, but a willing to beat a person can only put the responsibility on the person who is willing to be beaten.
At work, too!
Ask a few questions for us to ponder and see if we can really be objective?
Consider a few scenarios:
Scenario one
You found a marketing problem, and when you were about to issue an audit conclusion, the marketer tried to argue that it would be the employee who would ask you what system you were basing? A moment for the manager to argue? After a while, the director interceded, and even invited the vice president of marketing to ask the auditor for explanation.
The implication is: if you don't reduce their responsibilities, they will always come to you for "theory", if you only need to reduce their responsibilities a little, they will approve of your audit report, at this time, will you reduce their responsibilities?
Scenario two
You find a problem where many people are responsible, but the system does not divide responsibilities clearly. At this time, only one employee took the initiative to take the responsibility, and the other employees were all pushing the responsibility, what would you do? Will everyone be held the same responsibility?
Scenario three
The same problem was audited, and one of the audited people smiled and greeted, as if grateful to you for "helping them find out the problem and change their work", and the attitude was sincere "I will improve in the future, I hope that the audit report can be written a little euphemistically";
Another employee, who was cold to the auditors, did not explain at all.
For two people with very different attitudes, are you making audit judgments or writing the same wording of the audit report?
In the end, will there really be a phenomenon of "bad money expelling good money", and those who are responsible will have to carry more pots!
It's really worth thinking about!
Please pay more attention to the forwarding!